Political Compass

It looks like I'm still the queen of the left.

:think: I am suddenly wondering if I appear batshit insane, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littlelolligagged

It looks like I'm still the queen of the left.

:think: I am suddenly wondering if I appear batshit insane, though.

---

Excuse me? We got the exact same score on the left-right scale

Did we? Oh good. I didn't want to be all alone.

I'm still queen, though. You can be princess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littlelolligagged

Did we? Oh good. I didn't want to be all alone.

I'm still queen, though. You can be princess.

---

Normally I'd call you a whore, but the fair and balanced moderating process at Atari have proved I'm the whore, and you're the untarnished princess, princess. :coffee:

:lol: That is so fucking unfair. I want my sex WL, damn it.

Whore.

Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.13

I'm pretty far left apparently.

No, you aren't.

I didn't think you'd be that far left economically, supermario man...:bulb:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

I didn't think you'd be that far left economically, supermario man...:/

---

You sound so disappointed :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

I didn't think you'd be that far left economically, supermario man...:bulb:

---

Being screwed over by Wall Street tends to do that to people I guess. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Maybe this will convince Tear that I haven't stopped thinking. :o

---

1) Same score from teens to mid 20s means you're thinking? I'd say it means the opposite. :p

2) There's a difference between what one's beliefs are and how he defends them.

Me:
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...Picture1-3.jpg

A couple of thoughts:
1) I wish I could compare 1/00,1/05 and 1/10. I'm pretty sure I've shifted leftwards on economics, and libertarian wrt religion in response to the Bush years and the economic plunge.

2) I found on almost every economic question that I wanted a 5th answer that was right in the middle. So actually I think I lie rightwards on that.

Economic Left/Right: 3.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26

Dread copied me. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by '

['ear]

1) Same score from teens to mid 20s means you're thinking? I'd say it means the opposite. :p

2) There's a difference between what one's beliefs are and how he defends them.

---

Bullshit, my point is that my views have shifted, but not in the extreme that you suggest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Bullshit, my point is that my views have shifted, but not in the extreme that you suggest.

---

Now now

The questionnaire is flawed

And you do seem pretty corporate-happy

Lots of things make me happy. Doesn't make me a right-wing extremist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Lots of things make me happy. Doesn't make me a right-wing extremist.

---

You're using tainted language there; right-wing extremism is ripe with all sorts of jackasses ranging from "white supremacists" to evangelical preachers. No one is saying you hate negroes or crave for Rapture. However you do seem to support most of the heinous economical right-wing views.

The thing is I'm not sure they are all that far right if you put them on a scale of economic views. Maybe compared to Communist Scandinavia, but it's not like I'm saying we should privatize firefighters and such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

Because the delay of progress can be seen as a good thing (e.g. not rushing through legislation).

---

Yep, this point goes very far IMO. I think too many people and politicians support activism/actionism. In the end what is more for important than fast legislative is a stable political system. This way companies can do long term investments. Things that need short hand reactions (like handling disasters) should be handed to the executive anyway.

Of course I am a little based, living in one of the slowest political systems of the world. But we seem to do well with it.

Hm.

I just found a link to one of these that i did a while ago. Looks like ive changed a lot more than i thought.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/face...5.88&soc=-7.33

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

The thing is I'm not sure they are all that far right if you put them on a scale of economic views. Maybe compared to Communist Scandinavia, but it's not like I'm saying we should privatize firefighters and such.

---

And for some reason our children are so much better off than yours. Is it racial, or is it the socialism :coffee:

(Unfortunately we are going extinct :flail:)

Or the homogeneity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wraith

Or the homogeneity?

---

That'd be the racial bit, sweetums

At least compared to the gods-awful mish-mash you folks have over there :coffee:

I think the cultural side of things is more important than the ethnic, but it's late and I'm tired and I did miss the racial bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wraith

I think the cultural side of things is more important than the ethnic, but it's late and I'm tired and I did miss the racial bit.

---

*shrug* Cultures foster among communities, and even without "white pride" jackasses the various ethnicities in the US seem to have congregated amongst themselves

http://www.politicalcompass.org/face...0.50&soc=-2.56

Almost exactly the same as last time, I think :flail:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS

But if progress is really what it means--an improvement--then why delay it? Progress should come swiftly, and heck, if there's no official way to dispute it without getting your head chopped off, there's no need to worry about dissent.

---

'Progress' is not always an advantage. Nor should it necessarily come swiftly, it should come right.

Quote:

---

I think this has to do with what side of the argument you're on, too. An advocate of democracy would make an argument similar to yours because they believe in the principles of the system (ie the people decide through their representation what's best for them), while a Phoxe...erm, fascist would say the trepidation in passing legislature is a sign of weakness, etc.

---

This is a very good example actually. Phoxe's completely ballsed-up implementation of the rule changes shows a one-party-state attitude to change, rushing it through without dissent. In my case being removed due to behind-the-scenes dissent. Did it work? I'd say no. A slower, but more managed, well-discussed implementation could have worked much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wraith

I never bought that logic, though I can't remember if I participated in that discussion. It's like saying you can't claim a car has a speed advantage over a horse because sometimes you won't like where you're driving to. The problem with one party systems is not in how fast they can get things done, it's in what they get done. Their speed of action is an advantage that often isn't used towards good ends.

---

No, its like saying driving to the speed limit (Democracy), is safer than driving with your foot down at full speed at all times (One party state). Yes, you'll get from A to B quicker if you're travelling at 140mph in a residential area, but chances are you'll crash and hurt yourself or others, miss a required turning because you didn't realise you needed to turn etc

All this highlights is the ambiguity of the question. As above, depending on what scenario you place it in, you get different answers.

I can easily see myself seeing it from Rands point of view if that was what was meant. Without said information though, i have to take it on face value - "The factor to consider is speed. Does a dictatorship have an advantage over a democracy" Answer - yes.

Without more information, you have to go with the simplest possible interpretation.

An apt metaphor, Randy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

No, its like saying driving to the speed limit (Democracy), is safer than driving with your foot down at full speed at all times (One party state). Yes, you'll get from A to B quicker if you're travelling at 140mph in a residential area, but chances are you'll crash and hurt yourself or others, miss a required turning because you didn't realise you needed to turn etc

---

But is a one party state equivalent to driving at full speed? Single-party states can get pretty cozy for the leaders. When the ruling party has no serious competitors it may get complacent, utilizing "the machine" (whether its electoral [in the case of democracy] or violent [in the case of dictatorship]) to keep it in power and keep alternative voices from gaining any traction in government. Of course, this coziness eventually leads to decay and downfall, but it can take a while to happen.

Just disputing your analogy ;) . As well as the question from the test... Nessus is dead on in that there are a huge number of assumptions underlying most of these questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

No, its like saying driving to the speed limit (Democracy), is safer than driving with your foot down at full speed at all times (One party state). Yes, you'll get from A to B quicker if you're travelling at 140mph in a residential area, but chances are you'll crash and hurt yourself or others, miss a required turning because you didn't realise you needed to turn etc

---

I'm sticking witht he car & horse analogy. You can get wherever you need to go faster, but you don't have to. It's not an flaw that the car can go faster than the horse, or that some cars can go faster than other cars. If you're going faster than is safe given your ability, the blame isn't on your capability for speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

'Progress' is not always an advantage. Nor should it necessarily come swiftly, it should come right.

This is a very good example actually. Phoxe's completely ballsed-up implementation of the rule changes shows a one-party-state attitude to change, rushing it through without dissent. In my case being removed due to behind-the-scenes dissent. Did it work? I'd say no. A slower, but more managed, well-discussed implementation could have worked much better.

No, its like saying driving to the speed limit (Democracy), is safer than driving with your foot down at full speed at all times (One party state). Yes, you'll get from A to B quicker if you're travelling at 140mph in a residential area, but chances are you'll crash and hurt yourself or others, miss a required turning because you didn't realise you needed to turn etc

---

All very good points, and I think in the end Spawnie still gets it right; the ambiguity of the questions forces you to go with whatever your mind decides the simplest interpretation is.

Everyone complains about the questions. But the way you interpret the question is part of the psych evaluation that goes into the calculation of your score.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Being

But the way you interpret the question is part of the psych evaluation that goes into the calculation of your score.

---

... And how exactly is the test supposed to magically determine how I interpreted a question when I answered it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tempus Vernum

... And how exactly is the test supposed to magically determine how I interpreted a question when I answered it?

---

Magic? Not at all. Have you noticed how some of the questions seem to be a bit redundant? Without taking into account the degree of the answers there are 4 combinations of answers to those sets of redundant questions.

For/For
For/Against
Against/For
Against/Against

Weighting those with the degree of the answers provide substantial information for psychological analyis portion of the evaluation. It would be interesting to see the formula used. It is probably quite involved.

I moved a bit more center...

http://www.politicalcompass.org/face...3.12&soc=-3.95

Economic Left/Right: 3.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95

No social conservatives. Huh.

C'mon Lewk. Share!

How much credence do people actually put into these personality profilers? What is the likelihood of there being a response to any one, let alone all, of the questions that accurately demonstrates your views. I know it's fun to do, any reader of Cosmo can tell you that, but I can think of many things more fun than this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rumrunner

How much credence do people actually put into these personality profilers? What is the likelihood of there being a response to any one, let alone all, of the questions that accurately demonstrates your views. I know it's fun to do, any reader of Cosmo can tell you that, but I can think of many things more fun than this.

---

Sure, but what else are we supposed to do at work?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tempus Vernum

Sure, but what else are we supposed to do at work?

---

Work? What the hell have I been doing? :headbang:

Did someone say inter-office 'politicing' *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*